» ISP News » 

UPDATE BT Detail Coverage for the First 330Mbps G.fast Broadband Pilot Areas

Wednesday, May 31st, 2017 (2:21 pm) - Score 24,107

Openreach (BT) has today officially started to switch-on the pilot locations for their new 330Mbps capable G.fast broadband technology, which has spent the past few months being deployed to 138,000 UK premises. As part of that we’ve also got some new coverage details.

At present BT aims to make “ultrafast broadband” (100Mbps+) speeds available to 12 million UK homes and businesses via a mix Fibre-to-the-Premise (FTTP) and hybrid-fibre G.fast (ITU G.9700/9701) technology by the end of 2020, with many more expected to follow by 2025. Most of their plan is dominated by G.fast (10 million premises), although Openreach are consulting on a “large scaleFTTP roll-out (here).

However today our focus is on the hybrid-fibre G.fast service, which will offer two product tiers with download speeds of up to 160Mbps (30Mbps upload) and up to 330Mbps (30Mbps upload).

Kim Mears, Openreach MD for Infrastructure Delivery, said:

“The UK is ahead of its major European neighbours when it comes to superfast broadband but technology never stands still – that’s why we’re building on our existing fibre network and leading the way in deploying ultrafast speeds.

We need to stay ahead in order to meet the evolving needs of our customers. G.fast will allow us to do that by building on the investment we have made in fibre to date. It will transform the UK broadband landscape from superfast to ultrafast, and it will reach the largest number of people in the quickest possible time.”

The technology itself works in a similar way to FTTC (VDSL2) by running a fibre optic cable to your local PCP Street Cabinet, which is then fitted with an extension “pod” (right side of cabinet) that houses the G.fast line cards (currently this handles up to 48 ports, but it should extend to 96 this summer).

gfast long openreach diagram

Properties that exist less than 350 metres from this cabinet (copper line distance) should be able to receive close to the best download speeds, although poor home wiring can be a hindrance and speeds fall away rapidly on longer line lengths (500 metres is about the current limit). Check out the initial wholesale pricing, which may help you to understand how much it will cost to buy.

Future improvements may help the coverage situation and further down the road we may also see Openreach deploying G.fast deeper into their network via FTTdp (i.e. smaller nodes built closer to properties). Otherwise we already know of 17 UK locations that are benefiting from the G.fast pilot, not to mention Antrim in Northern Ireland. Other additions to this list include Newbury (Berkshire), Newmarket (Suffolk) and South Clapham (London).

Today Openreach has finally started to release, albeit in a very piecemeal way, some details on precisely which parts of the initial pilot locations will be able to order the service.

G.fast Pilot Coverage

* Derby, Derbyshire

13,000 premises in places like Darley, Derwent and Mackworth.

* Edinburgh + Glasgow, Scotland

16,900 premises in parts of Sighthill, Gorgie, Corstorphine, Murrayfield, Fountainbridge, Craiglockhart, the Meadows and Morningside in Edinburgh. Parts of Linn and Rutherglen in Glasgow will also benefit.

* Cheltenham, Gloucestershire

12,600 premises in places like All Saints, Battledown, Charlton Kings, Landsdown, Leckhampton, Oakley, Park, Pittville, St Mark’s, St Paul’s, St Peter’s and Warden Hill.

* St Austell, Cornwall

3,000 premises in parts of the wards of St Austell Bay, Bethel, Gover, Poltair, Mount Charles, St Mewan and Penwithick and Boscoppa.

* Cherry Hinton (Cambridgeshire), Huntingdon (Cambridgeshire) and Newmarket (Suffolk)

13,000 premises in places like Cherry Hinton, Coleridge, Histon and Petersfield.

4,500 premises in places like Godmanchester, Huntingdon East, Huntingdon West, Brampton and Huntingdon North.

4,500 premises in places such as All Saints, Severals and St Mary’s.

* Luton, Bedfordshire

19,000 premises in places like South Luton, Round Green, Wigmore and Biscot.

* Greater Manchester

25,000 premises in areas of Bolton, such as Heaton and Lostock and areas of Manchester such as Rusholme and Longsight.

* Swansea, Wales

12,500 premises in places like Uplands, Sketty, Gowerton and Townhill.

* Gillingham, Kent

16,000 premises in places like Gillingham North, Gillingham South, Watling, Rochester Peninsula, Rochester East, Strood North, Rochester South and Horsted and Rochester West.

* Newbury, West Berkshire

3,000 premises in places like Clay Hill, Greenham, Northcroft, St Johns and Victoria.

* Swindon, Wiltshire

19,800 premises in places like the Old Town, Eastcott, Covingham and Dorcan.

* Sheffield

8,900 premises in places like Broomhill, Sharrow Vale, Crookes, Crosspool, Manor Castle and Arbourthorne.

* Newcastle

5,800 premises in places like Fawdon, East Gosforth, Kenton and Parklands.

* London

13,000 premises in places like Balham, South Clapham and Upton Park.

At present we’ve yet to see any public packages for G.fast and the vast majority of ISPs do not offer such a product, although Openreach’s website highlights BT and TalkTalk as trial providers. We will update this article with more locations as they are published.

Now for those who care, here’s what the inside of a G.fast extension pod looks like.


UPDATE 23rd June 2017

Just added the details for London above, which have only been confirmed today.

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Tags: , , , ,
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on Twitter, , Facebook and Linkedin.
Leave a Comment
53 Responses
  1. CarlT says:

    In before the drama. Pass the popcorn.

    1. FibreFred says:

      Gfast? I can’t even get over 1Mbps what about me?
      BT should be investing in pure fibre not this dead end tech, we need fibre moral and optic
      BT should be investing in pure fibre not this dead end tech, they could afford it if they weren’t using line rental money to fund BT Sports
      What about EO lines???
      Where is the plan to fibre the whole of the UK?
      Is this available in Rural Areas? If not why not?

      I think that covers most of them in one post

    2. Adam Jarvis says:

      Can we get a few clarifications.

      Like the previous pointless G.fast trials – Swansea etc, are the Pilots completely new separate infrastructure/copper cabling i.e. new separate copper cabling infrastructure to specified premises, to prevent crosstalk interference with existing FTTC/ADSL to make the headline figures look far higher, over distance than would otherwise be in a real world deployment over existing infrastructure.

      Second, I take exception with ‘deployed to 138,000 UK premises’, ‘potentially passing up to 138,000 UK premises’ is surely the accurate description. If its deployed to 138,0000, that would require BT to have installed 2875 Green pods to date, with 48 G.fast ports each. In Edinburgh alone that is 352 additional green pods and that clearly not the case (so far).

      If all 12m households took the service that’s an extra 250,000 Pods at 48 ports per Pod, how is this really cheaper than street by street “simpler/more robust/lower maintance costs” fibre rollout? BT are skewing the cost calculation to prop up/biasing the data in favour of sweating their obsolete Copper Carcass infrastructure, and we’re all going to be paying the price, long term, with a below par National Broadband infrastucture, especially comapared to what Germany has recently proposed.

      If BT wanted to provide equal blanket coverage with G.fast (not “up to” Ultrafast speeds), my calculation is that you require up to 25 G.fast nodes per 2Km2 area, to achieve near blanket coverage of G.fast in that very small area, it would still have to be sweated/max out to achieve speeds comparable speeds to the lowest potential speeds of pure fibre rollout, not ‘up to’ from zero up, based on distance from the cabinet, with a very narrow cut off/drop off.

      Let’s get this clear, this won’t help anyone rurally (so many G.fast pods in as such a small area is a potential can of worms, would be too expensive to maintain, there isn’t the manpower rurally), it won’t help anyone with a line length more than 500m (250m as the crow flies) from the existing FTTC cabinet (assuming you have one and are not on an EO line).
      Importantly BT are not offering any solution for people with lines greater than 500m here using G.fast technologies, here.

      G.fast can’t be installed where an existing telecom’s provider has taken advantage of PIA (Physical Infrastructure Access) to install their own vectoring based technology, the two technologies can’t co-exist on the same lines.

      Ofcom are fudging competition rules, by allowing BT to continue to rollout G.fast copper based technologies, as this prevents any other telecom provider from also rolling out copper based vectoring technologies.

      Ofcom are complicit in this lie, you only have to look at the Senior Management positions in Ofcom to find them filled with ex-BT Senior Management.

      The hype and potential hoodwinking/lies regarding Pointless G.fast are worst than the BT fraud uncovered in Italy. BT pretty much ‘owns’ the regulator, having parachuted individuals into key regulatory roles.

    3. MikeW says:

      No. Using standard copper infrastructure, not newly-installed copper. The first trials required that step because the ANFP hadn’t been updated.

      Agree over deployed vs passed. Unfortunately the fibre-nazi brigade turned “passed” into a dirty word.

      Forget all 12m taking a G.Fast service. Only 25-30%ish bother going for 80/20 today, and everyone who can choose a G.Fast service will already be able to get 80/20 speeds. Like VM, you might find that max 10% will take a 330 service, and maybe 10% will take a 160 service.

      On line lengths, you should be careful choosing to double the crow-flies distance. Multiplying by the square root of 2 is a better approximation to the maximum in urban areas.

      No it won’t help rural. No it won’t help longer lines … at first. Though BT have said they will install further nodes, similar to their infill AIO cabs. Just not at first.

      G.Fast isn’t incompatible with other operators “vectoring” equipment. Vectoring alone just doesn’t come into it. The problem occurs when 2 nodes use the same spectrum and rely on vectoring to counter crosstalk. If BT figure out how to reuse spectrum for both VDSL2 and G.Fast, then it might present issues.

      You are talking nonsense wrt competition. It’ll only matter when you can find a CP willing to put hardware out there in scale, and both TT and Sky have proven it isn’t for them. Who else?

  2. FastInternetPlz says:

    Still on rubbish internet here, so yeah fun times……. Frustration and Anger doesn’t even come close to how I feel. Openreach should be renamed to Slowreach because they are so slow at doing their job…. I need fast internet right now but I am stuck waiting for damn FTTC a outdated technology. Not even VM can be bothered to cable my street up when they have their network just down the road from me.

    1. CarlT says:

      Openreach’s deployment is very fast by most standards. They’ve passed a lot of properties with FTTC quickly. They haven’t done this by building cabinets one at a time but many in parallel.

      From the time they gave the thumbs up to build here until ready for service was a little over 11 months which is about average. This after a pretty well publicised campaign.

      That is probably a reasonable guideline. They don’t prioritise based on what people think they need unfortunately.

    2. RuralBroadband says:

      To meet CarlT’s popcorn intake requirements *slowly passes one piece of popcorn*:
      I propose a rollout policy, all UK premises are placed on a chronological queue, and once they have been upgraded they are added to the end of the queue, meaning that they have to wait their turn.
      So instead of upgrading the ‘already above 10mbit’ superfast to ultrafast/G-Fast in order to ‘number massage’ the UK Broadband performance chart position, the rural locations that are not financially exploitable/viable get an opportunity to be upgraded.
      I base this propsal on having 2x N-Fast (Not-Fast) Lines and am unable to get anywhere close to the 10 mbit speed with them together.BT & Openreach have recently confirmed that they have NO plans to upgrade my line at any stage, and to work with a local community group which doesnt exist.
      *slowly passes another piece of popcorn to CarlT*

    3. Steve Jones says:


      You can propose what you like when it comes to publicly subsidised infrastructure as that’s a matter of public policy. However, when it comes to commercially funded roll-outs paid for by private funds, then that’s a very different matter. Private investors put money into commercial ventures where there is a prospect of a return being made and will prioritise accordingly.

      If the government wants a system such as you want then they had better come up with an industry structure where it makes commercial sense. That essentially means some form of subsidy system, whether in-industry or with public money.

    4. RuralBroadband says:

      @Steve Jones
      They could maybe use some sort of “£1bn Digital Infrastructure Fund” or perhaps a fund called Broadband Delivery United Kingdom (BDUK) of £1.7 Billion?
      The BDUK performance numbers for March 2017 show 550 million and 4.4 million premises, which means there should be £1.1 billion somewhere I guess, unless it was given to the private investors looking for their return on investment?

    5. GNewton says:

      @Steve Jones: While a prospect of a return being made is important for commercial investments you don’t want to shoot yourself in the foot. It looks like G.fast will be focused on commercial areas which already have cheap VDSL services. For many a cheap 40mbps VDSL service is more than sufficient, so there won’t be much of an enticement for them to upgrade to a much more expensive G.fast service. There is the possibility that alternative fibre network providers will steal the show.

    6. Fibreless says:

      100% agree, in exactly the same situation as you. I’m in a new development in Reading and we have been shafted by Slowreach, the developer and VM. Waiting for over a year already for Slowreach to upgrade our cabinet to FTTC, the timeline keeps moving out whenever I ask for an update. Even tried Hyperoptic and VM they are down the road from us but neither seem bothered with cabling our area even though i have numerous residents express interest. I have given up now, it will happen when it happens, if it ever happens. When they quote these numbers of people getting superfast, FTTP, G-Fast etc I always wonder who they are as all I see is little to no progress with this topic.

    7. Steve Jones says:


      Read the small print. That £550m is just the central government funded part. With match funding you can roughly double that, so there isn’t £1.1bn left. That’s even treating the £1.7bn as the real figure. From what I recall that included some other state funded initiatives as well.

      However, the operation of gain-share means that considerable amounts of money are available for reinvestment. Around £400m or so. However, it’s not BT’s money to decide what to do. The local BDUK projects have to decide whether to reinvest it and how. A few have announced follow-on projects, and no doubt that will be used to address some of the more rural areas. However, it will not go as far as the cost per premises goes up a lot. I seem to recall some of the follow-on projects are of the order of £2k or more per premises of public money.

      But, to repeat, it’s not BT’s money, and they have no power to spend it. It may be sitting in a BT bank account (although, more likely, it’s just on the books as a liability), but it’s not a free pot to dip into.

  3. Plexis says:

    Have been attempting to get on the trial with BT, but they keep saying its Openreach that have chosen the addresses that are being trialled.

    But then speaking to Openreach it’s the providers who pick.

    All very confusing, and annoying as the speed checker says I can get the full speeds.

    1. CarlT says:

      Openreach decide which cabinets get the pods and when. Until they are built no provider can accept orders.

      Once the pod is in place the provider decides whether they will supply service there.

      You didn’t mention if there was a pod attached to your PCP or not.

    2. Plexis says:

      It’s definitely there. DSL checker also says I can get it.

      Checker says 330 Down, 50 up for Clean (Which I believe there are no self-installs for G-Fast yet)

    3. Lee says:

      As was said on the BT forum, you need to wait a little bit. This has only now gone to pilot, previously it was only a trial and ISP systems/flows/packages wouldn’t have been created for the masses purely for a trial.

      Now that 130,000 lines have it available, I expect BT to be amongst the first to start offering it to customers very shortly.

  4. Declan M says:

    Saw these pods pop up around edinburgh just wish my cabinet was having this done.

  5. Marty says:

    I can see how G.fast would benefit the many quite quickly and cheaply which is good. What about the hard to get to areas with no access to superfast broadband will they be served with FTTdp or extra cabinets? And with copper you have the distance to the cabinet and drop off in speed being like a lottery in some areas not forgetting data demands in the future are only ever going to increase with multiple 4k gaming, video and bandwidth heavy applications.

    Upload speeds will be critical too when using any of these.
    Getting FTTC and G.FAST to co exist with vectoring at the moment while lowering interference is like fixing a broken leg with a wet rag dipped in kerosene.

    But I’m hoping with this trial openreach Sckipio boffins will sort out the issues one way or another. The only other alternative will be large scale FTTP/FTTdp rollout in stages.

    1. JustAnotherFileServer says:

      A lot of issues have already been ironed out in the trial and now it’s been rolled out as a pilot it should get what remaining issues are left sorted to.

    2. Adam Jarvis says:

      “A lot of issues have already been ironed out in the trial and now it’s been rolled out as a pilot it should get what remaining issues are left sorted to”

      aka. Vapourware.

      I’ve heard this apologise response so often regards software, over the years. We have tried and tested technology in the form of pure fibre, that once deployed is simpler and has much lower maintenance costs. It’s much more a “deploy and forget” technology, that just works come rain or shine, with organisations like B4RN showing the way (and showing the expensive subsidies paid to BT – BDUK/Ofcom/BT approach is flawed), in terms of community led rural rollout.

      Every comment page regarding fibre/G.fast always include the obligatory “Fibre is expensive/G.fast is cheap” BT endorsed tag-line and give us (BT) handouts if you want pure fibre, somehow forgetting we’ve all paid line rental charges, for years, to maintain/improve the network.

    3. Steve Jones says:

      @Adam Jarvis

      It looks like anything but vapour-ware. The technology of g.fast is still very new and full production kit is only becoming available in volume. All new technologies require trials and pilots. Note just the basic kit, but the many things that are required to make the whole thing deliverable in volume. Training, installation, back-end systems, wholesale interfaces, fault management, billing and hundreds of other things. Once it starts, then roll-out will ramp up quickly limited by the resources available.

      If it was vapour-ware it wouldn’t go into production. This most certainly is.

    4. GNewton says:

      @Adam Jarvis: The total cost for doing nationwide fibre is estimated to be in the £15Billion to £25Billion range, something BT is unable to do, it’s huge pension burden alone will prevent it from ever doing so on a larger scale. It’s the equivalent of several decades worth of Openreach’s annual turnover, so it’s well beyond the scope of private investors in that company. The various BDUK projects also contributed to the UK fibre farce, preventing market competition and mainly having been geared toward subsidising BT. All of this in addition to having built multiple access networks in many places, you wouldn’t do that for water or electricity. You are dealing here with decades of wrong broadband policies.

      G.Fast will at best be just another interim solution, targeting the wrong areas.

    5. MikeW says:

      G.Fast will, at first, help the subgroup within 300m of the cabinet. In time, infill will help the next group up to 600m. It might even go further, but that’ll be a stretch.

      But I wouldn’t expect it to help the very long lines. Something that is too long for superfast speeds doesn’t appear, on the face of it, to be any more amenable to coverage by G.fast.

      I’m not sure you’ve paid line rental for years in order to either improve the copper or to install fibre. Ofcom’s charge structure effectively allows Openreach to make a trivial profit based on long-term average calculations … assuming the network needs no more than ongoing average maintenance. The wholesale price keeps reducing because Ofcom believes Openreach can keep getting “more efficient” too.

      As for vaporware … I suggest you check what it means. We now here there are more live deployments in the US.

      Hard to have had multiple decades of wrong broadband policies when broadband itself hasn’t existed for multiple decades. Perhaps you want to rein in the hyperbole.

    6. GNewton says:

      @MikeW: ADSL was introduced to the UK in trial stages in 1998 and a commercial product was launched in 2000. But the failed policies can be traced back to Thatcher’s years.

    7. TheFacts says:

      The main one being stopping BT rolling out fibre as they wanted to put TV over it and that would affect the cable TV companies. Who then added phone and internet…

    8. GNewton says:

      @TheFacts: This is not the full story: The ban on BT to do TV was lifted in January 2001, and for many years nobody has prevented BT from doing fibre. There are many other reasons for the failed broadband policy in the UK, in addition to incompetence by companies like BT.

  6. CarlD says:

    I’m still on a 2.5mb connection with even less useable bandwidth thereafter. Several calls to BT and Openreach to try and find out if any tech like fibre or g.fast will be made available but only if it’s viable to their business. Looks like I’m going nowhere fast with streaming video, online backups, online gaming, remote working, can’t even use payment gateways half the time as the site sessions timeout!

    Living in the outskirts of Bristol, a digital thriving city and feel extremely left behind. I haven’t experienced a connection like this since broadband first came out!

    1. Optical says:

      Well, I’m just about a mile from Bath in a village,we have two cabinets,one cabinet was enabled for FTTC back in 2011, other one been waiting near 7 years to be enable.
      Latest BTOR joke is FTTPoD, it’s just come available on my cabinet,couldn’t even afford it,probably same for a lot of peeps in village.
      Bath was selected has a ‘First FTTP Roll-out Areas’,last year, well it’s missed me.

  7. Dan Spurr says:

    Derbyshire son of a *&%^#.

    So Close.

  8. Brian Chaplin says:

    After waiting 24 months for work to be completed on the fibre upgrade to my local cabinet, I’m told by my ISP (EE) that BT/Openreach have not released the service to them. I would have to switch to BT or Zen or one other provider. EE tells me it may take up to another 24 months before BT/Openreach release the service to them to take orders. Surely this isn’t right !! My last speed check (when I was able to get a service) was 0.5Mbs !!

    1. Lee says:

      Load of rubbish.

      EE are now owned by BT group anyway, so moving to BT would mean you’re still paying into the same pocket.

  9. Jono says:

    What kind of work is involved in installing the pod next to the cab?

    Getting FTTC took a look of time and I was told it was down to getting power to the cab.

    Now the cab has power is installing the pod relatively straight forward?

    1. jonathan roberts says:

      at a guess id say

      install new pod,
      tie pair cable from new pod to pcp.
      hybrid power and fibre cable from exisitng dslam to the new pod.
      finally blow in a new fibre to the exisiting dslan and splice it through to the new pod

  10. Jazzy says:

    Parklands 🙂 🙂 🙂 It’s the part of Newcastle where I live 😉

    I am with Sky so will have to wait for them to roll it out, hopefully they will before my current contract is up next March. I currently get 70mb

  11. lyndon says:

    Can long reach VDSL not be applied at the same time to allow bandwith improvement for those over 500m?

    1. Lee says:

      LR-VDSL needsa cabinet to have no ADSL lines going through it

    2. Adam Jarvis says:

      You have to remove all the ADSL LLU from the exchange (aswell as BT ADSL), and probably why Sky/Moneysavingexpert.com have had so many promotions of late for 12m ‘free’ ADSL (paying only line rental). Sky have obviously seen there is money to made through being financially compensated by Ofcom/BT for the disruption caused in shifting all its ADSL customer’s off ADSL to FTTC, in the next few years.

      Without doing so, BT can’t deploy LR-VDSL effectively. Sky saw the potential opportunity here with their LLU ADSL, decided to make sure they had as many ADSL customers as possible (using special promotions, i.e. whatever the cost) before that compensatory decision is made.

    3. MikeW says:

      LR-VDSL only requires that there is no ADSL through the cabinets chosen to support long-range. Lines through other cabinets, and EO lines, can continue to be supplied by exchange-based ADSL, either BT or LLU.

  12. Stephen says:

    If the extension pod doesn’t have the air vents, is this just an extension of the PCP cabinet for more phone lines? I’ve seen a few like this around Aberdeen/shire.

    1. Lee says:


  13. jeep says:

    To many commitees,to many consultations not enough action as per the norm it seems in this country now, wonder how much money both government & private has been spent on “oops free lunches” instead of getting on with the job ?

  14. Adam says:

    Does the pod have to go on the right of the PCP?

    What happens if there is no space to the right of the PCP can it go to the left?

    1. Lee says:

      It can go on either AFAIK.

  15. craski says:

    On a similar vein as Adams question, how will G.Fast be deployed from All-in-One cabinets? Does the pod fit them too or will G.Fast cards be used within the existing AIO cabinet?

    1. CarlT says:

      It won’t in this first wave as far as I know. Not happening until 2020 or later.

    2. Lee says:

      I wouldn’t expext anything for a long time. I suspect that G.Fast pods will be very much on the commercial cabs/cabs they feel they can get the most money for investment.

      Infil/AIO will most likely not meet the criteria.

    3. MikeW says:

      I think the G.Fast cards only fit into a newer generation of DSLAM/MSAN chassis with faster backplanes. If they are going to fit into an AIO, then it probably needs a more wholesale upgrade.

      I too doubt that an AIO will present enough demand to merit a pod. Not for a while, anyway. I don’t think it is just a matter of a cabinet supporting a lot of lines (eg 500+); more that there needs to be a lot of short lines. Eg lots of flats near the cabinet.

  16. Matt says:

    The UK is ahead of its major European neighbours when it comes to superfast broadband

    LOLOLOL no it isn’t.

    In Sweden I can get 1Gbit. In Netherlands I can get 1Gbit. In Romania they can get 1Gbit.
    Delivered via fibre, not copper. BT are either liars, or insane, or they don’t know jack about the rest of the world’s infrastructure

  17. felix says:

    I like chicken I live liver

  18. Sean Mcguigan says:

    When will gfast be a available to the public

  19. Alex Atkin says:

    Typical, rolling it out in Sheffield to areas who can already get Virgin while ignoring the areas that cannot.

  20. Joe M says:

    Gfast is the new Gslow! This is just unbelievable backward step with all that really really REALLY expensive copper technology again. All they need to do is install a £20 fiber modem and rate limit at the other end inside the router with features that already exist in all modern routers. They did this already when I oversee a 10gbit line install. So why all this really expensive copper drama with low speed links to push up costs by a factor of x100?

  21. Smallal says:

    Perhaps they ought to prioritise areas where ECI cabinets are installed, as these fail to provide even the basic 80mbps speeds for most people (due to the crosstalk problems caused by disabling G.INP). I’m about 60m from the cabinet & my speed went from 80mbps to just under 70mbps because of this.

Comments are closed.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.

NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.

NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Cheapest Ultrafast ISPs
  • Gigaclear £17.00
    Speed: 200Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Community Fibre £17.99
    Speed: 150Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Virgin Media £24.00
    Speed: 108Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £25.00
    Speed: 100Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Hyperoptic £25.00
    Speed: 158Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: Promo code: BIGBANG
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £17.99
    Speed 33Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: Promo code: BIGBANG
  • Shell Energy £20.99
    Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • NOW £22.00
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £22.00
    Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Plusnet £22.99
    Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £75 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (4209)
  2. BT (3182)
  3. Politics (2150)
  4. Building Digital UK (2042)
  5. Openreach (1997)
  6. FTTC (1931)
  7. Business (1867)
  8. Mobile Broadband (1630)
  9. Statistics (1525)
  10. 4G (1398)
  11. FTTH (1372)
  12. Virgin Media (1301)
  13. Ofcom Regulation (1251)
  14. Fibre Optic (1246)
  15. Wireless Internet (1244)
  16. Vodafone (940)
  17. 5G (923)
  18. EE (920)
  19. TalkTalk (832)
  20. Sky Broadband (795)
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact